Simon E. wrote:Oushi I do not dwell in Rigpa.It is quite obvious that you dont either.

And because of that we should derogate everyone that claims he dwells in it? No. I would be quite happy to hear that someone from this honorable company dwells in Rigpa. Unfortunately, I can only find people trying pull others down . What's funny, most of them made vows to liberate others.

gregkavarnos wrote:

oushi wrote:Yes, work out - To prove successful, effective, or satisfactory.

According to whose criteria?

Where those instructions you received, not sufficient?

Sufficient for what?

Sufficient to remain in the natural state beyond elaboration, which can also be seen as criteria of success.

Lets define discard and deny. In simple layman's terms denying would be to say something is not there, and to discard would be to cast out, to say it is of no use as it were. Either way, the dzogchen teachings do not discard or deny karma. There is no where in the large corpus of dzogchen teachings (which you have failed to quote) that says that karma is not important and needs to be discarded. You have yet to back up your claim that dzogchen "discards" karma. To back this up, I request that you find something from actual dzogchen literature, not some modern talk or book. I showed quotes from Longchenpa that clearly shows the importance of observing karma and the pitfalls of "discarding" it. Your claim was that because of compassion dzogchen has teachings for those of lesser capabilities. Again false, because in dzogchen the view is the same throughout, only different methods are presented for different capabilities.

You claim to understand dzogchen and Longchenpa, but you haven't even begun to scratch the surface. And this is just in the realm of reading, even if you could read everything out there you still would be so far off from an authentic experience of dzogchen because you have no conection through a teacher. For someone who claims to be sympathetic to Longchenpa I am surprised that you are not even familiar with his works. You quote from one poorly-made translation of the Neluk Dzo, but there is so much more out there. The theg mchog dzod goes, which is regarded as the most complete presentation of dzogchen out there goes into much detail about our samsaric condition. I will find quotes soon. Also, Longchenpa himself said that his Yantik Yizhin Norbu is a work that embodies all his knowledge. In this work you will find practices mean to purify karma and teachings on karma. I would hardly call this "discarding" karma.

So your idea of what dzogchen is is like the blind man grasping at the elephant, grabbing his tail, and deducing that elephants must be small, narrow, and tail-like. Yes, there are many teachings of dzogchen that teach from the perspective of the primordial ground, where there is no karma. But just reading one of these works and thinking that you know dzogchen is foolish. The point is is that dzogchen is not and has never been presented that way. Its not like teachers just told there students "You are all primordially enlightened, just discard karma. Nothing to worry about." This is the problem with reading a book or two without the guidance of a teacher and thinking that you have it all figured out.

So I ask you again, please show something from an original source- meaning the dzogchen tantras or the Nyingtik literature that says that karma is to be "discarded." Please note that I made a distintion for you between discard and deny. And please reconcile this quote from Longchenpa.

Such foolish and arrogant people who do not know the various meanings of the Dharma say, "There is no karma and no effects of karma. In suchness there is nothing. It is like space," and they abandon virtuous deeds and indulge in evil deeds. Those are nihilists and not followers of the Dharma.

Longchenpa, Chapter 4 Shingta Chenpo

And please try your best to take your own advice and not get personal. You accuse others of attacking you while you are pointing fingers and judging. You feel empowered to judge other's progress on their own personal, spiritual path (which, I must say is pretty rude), but you should look at your own. You could use a little humility. You are basically saying that you know more about a path that you are not even involved in than others who have spent years with teachers. But that is besides the point, I will be interested to see some of these passages from the dzogchen tantras that say karma is to be "discarded."

Most people are not willing to talk about their experiences with rigpa online. For myself, I will say that of course I do not dwell in it always, that is called enlightenment, but I will say that because of the blessings that I have recieved from my teachers I have a concrete base to work with. Without those blessings, my guess is is that I would probably be fooling myself. You need to understand that the "ponting-out" is so much more than a formality. It is more that just "OK, there it is- wow that was easy, I could have done that myself!" When you recieve pointing-out you recieve the blessings of the whole lineage and the protection of the dharma protectors. I am sure you will call this foolishness, but there is no way around this.

Please note that I was talking about "discarding" earlier, so it seems it was you who did not understand. In the Longchenpa quote I gave, he talks about the foolishness of those "abandoning" good deeds. I would say that abandon is a good synonym for discard, and good deeds would pertain to cause and effect, karma. So he is really saying how foolish it is to discard karma. I am only nitpicking here because you chose to do so. You would not reply to my posts because of my apparent misunderstanding, but really I am speaking your own language here- it is your term. So how do you account for this? Again, I would love to see some proof to back up your claim.

"Now, the ati-yogin of essence,forsakes all provisional techniquesdesigned for straight cause and effect babeson the lesser, ladder path,and binds the gnostic dynamicthat supersedes all clever techniqueto the yoke of the nonactive sky. - Lonchenpa"

When it comes to you long post... Fight the illusory dragon you are trying to create on your own.

Instead of insulting me, why don't you respond to what I have written. Again, you are looking at dzogchen from a narrow corner. The book by Dowman that you keep bringing up does not show that dzogchen "discards" karma. What that is saying is that lesser paths approach Buddhahood in a gradual way, in dzogchen you obtain the three kayas of Buddhahood instantly. Actually, you obtain a glimpse instantly. Nowhere does he say that karma is to be discarded, he is saying that rigpa does not come about through a long, gradual path. On the path in dzogchen you still must adhere to karma, this is why Longchenpa says:

Such foolish and arrogant people who do not know the various meanings of the Dharma say, "There is no karma and no effects of karma. In suchness there is nothing. It is like space," and they abandon virtuous deeds and indulge in evil deeds. Those are nihilists and not followers of the Dharma.

Longchenpa, Chapter 4 Shingta Chenpo

Just because you can rest in rigpa, does not mean that you don't adhere to karma. If dzogchen really discarded karma, then it would not have so many purification practices involved. So again, maybe you could actually respond to the passages I gave.

Actually, you don't "obtain" the three kayas, becasue they are primordially present, but you recognize them in your own being. One glimpse of rigpa will also not destroy all of the karmic baggage that has been accumulated throughout infinite time. Although recognizing rigpa is the best purification, even adpet yogis still need to practice to purify their karma, as well as respect cause and effect right up until complete enlightenment. If anything, dzogchen works with karma, it does not discard it.

Karma doesn't mean cause. It means action of a sentient being. And Phala doesn't mean effect. It means fruit of a sentient being's actions. There is no cause and effect in Buddhism as ontology. Hume's view of cause and effect is just as good here. It also leads to misconceptions about the teachings. When you start looking for causes, you are looking externally for logical connections and analysis about how things arose. What you have to do is look within at the genesis of tensions and actions. A path beyond karma and phala doesn't mean deeds will not be painful. It just means the path to realization was not gradual. Once the realization has become stable, then supposedly one would not commit a deed with negative karmic fallout as a kind of instinctive response of love and compassion.

oushi wrote:So, is there something between receiving instructions and remaining in the natural state beyond elaboration, that needs to be done?

That depends on how long you can rest in the natural state. Most people can only stay in the natural state for a few moments and even if you can stay a little longer you are far away from 24/7. When you are not resting in the natural state you are conditioned by your thoughts and all your actions will have effects, that is karma. The difference between sem (mind) and rigpa (the recognition of the natural state) is not a theory, it is something that have to be directly experienced. If not one might confuse "the idea of the natural state" with the actual natural state. It isn't very helpful to just cultivate a fantasy.

/magnus

"To reject practice by saying, 'it is conceptual!' is the path of fools. A tendency of the inexperienced and something to be avoided."- Longchenpa

gregkavarnos wrote:You are making the classic mistake of all Dzogchen wannabes: thinking that the one truth does not include relative truth.

First of all, I am not aspiring to become anyone. Secondly, how do you know what I am thinking about? I just "press buttons" and you people throw away everything you can think of. One quote and you start foaming . Now, how can I take such behavior seriously?

CrawfordHollow wrote:Instead of insulting me, why don't you respond to what I have written.

So, I have insulted you again... interesting. I will not respond to such nonsense. Your posts are full of such imaginary accusations.

heart wrote: If not one might confuse "the idea of the natural state" with the actual natural state.

I can assure you, that such a state will not last long if the person approach is honest.

Here is a nice excerpt from Dudjom Lingpa's Nang- jang regarding the conduct of a dzogchen yogi:

"The key point of conduct is to renounce nonvirtuous physicaland verbal activities as if they were poison, not overemphasizingview at the expense of conduct by thinking that sinceeverything is emptiness you will not be sullied by flaws no matterhow you behave. You must be calm, restrained, and careful,like someone who has been brought before the highestjudge.

-Dudjom Lingpa, Nang-jang

So regardless of how you define karma, it is not something that is discarded after rigpa has been stabilized. Note that this was spoken to Dudjom Lingpa in a pure vision from Shri Simha, it was not an instruction meant for someone with lower faculties. If somebody of the stature of Dudjom Lingpa, a terton who was sent to this world from Guru Rinpoche himself, was advised to respect the laws of karma, you can rest assured that that applies to all of us.

I think what this conversation really has brought to light is the danger of making conclusions about dzogchen based on one or two books that one has read. The work of Longchenpa alone is enormous, to take a few excerpts from one shoddy translation and conclude that this is the view of dzogchen is a grave error. These works really need to be studied under a teacher or misunderstandings are bound to occur,such as thinking that karma is to be discarded. There are references all through Longchenpa's work emphasizing this. In fact, Longchenpa would not have abided by the rules of the Vinaya and samaya if he believed that karma was to be discarded.

Oushi, If you want to believe that Longchenpa thinks that karma needs to be discarded, that is fine. I have shown you many passages that state otherwise, but you can believe what you will. I participate on these forums because I enjoy writing and communicating, that is why I write such long posts. I also think that it is important to explain yourself and back your claims up with sources. You seem to make your point by throwing insults. Rather than explaining your position, you have concluded that I am an inferior practitioner who is "fighting illusionary dragons", who can't have a civil conversation because of a lack of understanding,who is trying to make you look bad, and who is not far on their spiritual path. It is hard to take you seriously when this is how you respond when somebody disagrees with you. You still have yet to explain how the passages you provided implies that karma is to be discarded, or have you explained all of the quotes that I gave from Longchenpa and the tantras saying that karma must be observed.

Secondly, how do you know what I am thinking about? I just "press buttons" and you people throw away everything you can think of.

You cannot throw away something you never possessed: understanding.

One quote and you start foaming . Now, how can I take such behavior seriously?

Foaming? I am not foaming. Not by a long stretch. Why would I foam regarding your ignorance? I actually do sincerely wish you accumulate the merit to find a good teacher, you are sorely in need of one. You do not think so, but from my vantage point (and that of others, as can be seen by their comments) it is VERY obvious. Maybe we are all wrong and you are right. Maybe we are in the presence of a Pratyekabuddha. Given the inconsistencies in your arguments though, I doubt it very much.

So saying that I am not far on the spritual path is not an insult? What was it, a complement? And now you won't even respond to my posts. So when somebody proves you wrong, first you attack them, then you refuse to engage with them. Classic.

The point is, Oushi, is that rather than replying to what I have written, you instead chose to make impossible judgements on my character and my ability. You refuse to respond to me not because of what I have written, but because I have "misunderstanding." You are just being evasive and then pointing to me and saying it is my fault. All I am asking is that you explain yourself in light of the passages I have given. Notice that I have not made any judgements about you, I am just responding to what you write.

Regardless if you think that your words are insulting or not, they are still personal attacks. Do you not remember saying that I was not far on the path and that I am chasing dragons? You seem to find it easier to judge me rather than respond to my content. I don't know how I can make myself any clearer.

Secondly, how do you know what I am thinking about? I just "press buttons" and you people throw away everything you can think of.

You cannot throw away something you never possessed: understanding.[/quote]Are you stating here, that you never possessed understanding???

CrawfordHollow wrote:The point is, Oushi, is that rather than replying to what I have written, you instead chose to make impossible judgements on my character and my ability.

Go through the topic and see for yourself. You have accused me of judging your progress which I didn't do, and that was the point in which I concluded, that if you use lies to despise others, then you actually must be somewhere at the beginning of the path. Now, you keep on repeating how cruel I am toward your person. Please, get over it.And yes, you are fighting imagined dragon, because your accusations cannot be found in my posts. Insulting, denying karma... Did you notice, that I didn't use word karma even once? Make a search. I didn't even bother explaining how I see those issues, because I see how simple quotes make your blood boil.

heart wrote: If not one might confuse "the idea of the natural state" with the actual natural state.

I can assure you, that such a state will not last long if the person approach is honest.

Honesty is great and for this reason I have to tell you that if you don't know the difference between sem and rigpa it is a very easy mistake to make. For example the many beings in the formless god realm didn't know how to do this distinction, but eventually their samdhi ends and they are still in samsara.

/magnus

"To reject practice by saying, 'it is conceptual!' is the path of fools. A tendency of the inexperienced and something to be avoided."- Longchenpa

I am certainly stating here that I had no understanding. And that any glimpses I have had which led to any degree of understanding are entirely the result of the grace of my teachers.It is a paradox that a glimpse of the natural state happens only by our turning to that which appears to be external to us.